Reply #5: He's the one to dismantle the fascist fantasy that "Byrd did it first". .

[pat_k]

Byrd is an amazing Parliamentarian, and as such, has taken advantage of loopholes in existing rules. He has never (and I don't think he would ever) violated the rules.

The instance they frequently cite in their false accusations that "he did it first" was not a standard cloture situation, it was a "post-cloture filibuster." At the time, a loophole existed which allowed Byrd to end the post-cloture filibuster with a simple majority. His actions were in accordance with the rules (and I think he led the effort to close the loophole).

Byrd has never been a fan of filibusters, so I don't find it surprising that he took the morally consistent position of opposing the filibuster and supporting Alito in the floor vote (unlike others who think they can somehow reconcile opposing the filibuster (paving Alito's way to the court), and then vote against confirmation on the floor.

The fascists in the Senate are conspiring to violate the rules to change them, then to make use of the change they made in violation of the rules to change whatever rules they feel like. Sounds awful? Well, it is. It's like Alice in Wonderland -- fascism through the looking glass.

Just as Bush says he doesn't need a warrant because he says he doesn't, they claim to have the power to unilaterally declare the 3/4 majority required to change the rules null and void. By unilateral edict, they will only require a simple majority. Once they have violated the "rule changing rule" to "change the rule changing rule" they will merrily apply the rule they made in violation of the rules to change the rules governing cloture.

I say, let them go for it. It’s just another violation of our constitutional democracy to add to the ever expanding list.

I look forward to seeing Byrd take them apart.